Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
1 | 2 | 3 | 4


16 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 5


  Reply # 894304 11-Sep-2013 14:52
One person supports this post
Send private message

No Apologies Required! I think I know where I stand.
And that is in the wake of Telecom's Disfunction.

And it is very clear where the mistakes started, and that was  back when Telecom moved my phone numbers and destroyed my IP routing through there network.

I have made the right move.


I look forward to someone of authority on this subject providing a definitive answer.

810 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 191
Inactive user


  Reply # 894456 11-Sep-2013 20:16
Send private message

JamieB: No Apologies Required! I think I know where I stand.
And that is in the wake of Telecom's Disfunction.

And it is very clear where the mistakes started, and that was  back when Telecom moved my phone numbers and destroyed my IP routing through there network.

I have made the right move.


I look forward to someone of authority on this subject providing a definitive answer.

Seems to have been hashed to death already, if you want an even more definitive answer you may have to take it through the courts and/or get both sides to relinquish relevant records.

 
 
 
 


Mr Snotty
8074 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4051

Moderator
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 894464 11-Sep-2013 20:36
One person supports this post
Send private message

JamieB: No Apologies Required! I think I know where I stand.
And that is in the wake of Telecom's Disfunction.

And it is very clear where the mistakes started, and that was  back when Telecom moved my phone numbers and destroyed my IP routing through there network.

I have made the right move.


I look forward to someone of authority on this subject providing a definitive answer.


Also it's still unclear who's problem it really is, seems to be both parties. Everyone makes mistakes, be more humble and forgiving instead of calling anyone dysfunctional. There's plenty of customers who don't have any issues with them, it just seems you have high expectations for a residential ISP.




2861 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 683

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 894472 11-Sep-2013 20:50
5 people support this post
Send private message

well said Michael I thinks its a bit rough first time in forum to come accross as arrogant as he has.

I've been a telecom client for years and no issues taht I recall. I've also watched the telco people on here helping those that ask and all do a great job under sometimes trying situations and having to deal with emotional rants.

After reading the ops way of approaching this I wouldn't be helping even if I was able to so big ups to those of you that have




Galaxy S8

 

Garmin  Vivoactive 3






16 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 5


  Reply # 894556 12-Sep-2013 01:32
One person supports this post
Send private message

michaelmurfy:
Also it's still unclear who's problem it really is, seems to be both parties. Everyone makes mistakes, be more humble and forgiving instead of calling anyone dysfunctional. There's plenty of customers who don't have any issues with them, it just seems you have high expectations for a residential ISP.



High expectations?:
1 mistaken disconnection - I say let's sort it out.
1 mistaken disconnection that is not progressing - yeah, so I churn.
2nd mistaken disconnection - I ask for some support to get us through the difficulty.
3rd mistaken disconnection inside 2 weeks - Sorry, but now you are asking for it!

There have been a number of Telecom employees that have been very helpful, and quite a handful that have been unable to help.
I never said someone was dysfunctional, I said Telecom was.
To make someones problem go away is functional; to make the problem worse...?


Good bye... I have said my piece.
Thank you to those who have genuinely been helpful.

PaulBags - Great wisdom, thank you.

56 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 1


  Reply # 894666 12-Sep-2013 10:52
Send private message

In all honesty, yes there was an internal breakdown with communications at HD. We did not get a chance to object to the ABANDONMENT lodged against the SAM ID as we did not see it. This is on HD, we accept that.

We also accept that there is no blame to be put on Chorus, as they were functioning within the scope of their operation.

What HD does object to is the fact that an ABANDONMENT was lodged in the first place. This is outside the parameters of BAU at TCNZ Retail. The process for the lodgement of an ABANDONMENT is reasonably strict (I did lodge a few in my 5 years at TCNZ).

What has happened in this instance is that someone has followed a deprecated process, which happens (albeit rarely), at the end of the day, human error is human error.

The focus here is not who to blame for what has happened, but the best way to resolve what has happened and restore service to our customer.  To this end we have done what we can to expedite the process (which is unfortunately not a lot).

JamieB's service will be operational again this afternoon.

Regards,

Pierre (not Ben before you pipe up again Mike and John)
HD Net Ltd

6434 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1571


  Reply # 894671 12-Sep-2013 11:05
Send private message

DrFixIt: 

Hi All,

Full disclosure, I work for HD and have dealt with Jamie on several occasions.

.


Just curious,  how come you are tagged as Orcon employee if you work for HD?

23 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 8

Trusted
HD Net

  Reply # 894685 12-Sep-2013 11:26
Send private message

NonprayingMantis:
DrFixIt: 

Hi All,

Full disclosure, I work for HD and have dealt with Jamie on several occasions.

.


Just curious,  how come you are tagged as Orcon employee if you work for HD?


Used to work for Orcon before I moved to HD.
Multiple emails have been sent about my Orcon tag.
I imagine it'll be fixed shortly. .. Hence why I made sure to mention that first in my post :)

Mr Snotty
8074 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4051

Moderator
Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 894699 12-Sep-2013 12:11
5 people support this post
Send private message

This whole thread is cringe-worthy. Not what I'd expect for staff members to say. A wee tip when dealing with customers on social media is just own up to the problem, resolve any way you can without making any excuses, don't overcomplicate things and offer the best service you possibly can, the 2 HD reps here both had different stories which doesn't help the whole thing out. I'm personally a neutral body not working for any ISP but trust me, this thread has had a negative impact on my views of HD and for those doing a quick Google search they'll come across this + a myriad of other threads not in HD's favour.

JamieB:
High expectations?:
1 mistaken disconnection - I say let's sort it out.
1 mistaken disconnection that is not progressing - yeah, so I churn.
2nd mistaken disconnection - I ask for some support to get us through the difficulty.
3rd mistaken disconnection inside 2 weeks - Sorry, but now you are asking for it!

There have been a number of Telecom employees that have been very helpful, and quite a handful that have been unable to help.
I never said someone was dysfunctional, I said Telecom was.
To make someones problem go away is functional; to make the problem worse...?


I hear you Jamie, but as Jeffnz said you came across as arrogant and already placing the blame on somebody, as a new member to the forum the other members will be less willing to help out, if you continued this arrogance to the call centre reps they too will be thinking "who is this guy and why is he treating us the way he is" - It's all sweet to have expectations but I know from experience (since I run my own servers on my Telecom VDSL connection) that the port 25 unblock and the static IP is literally an online form which takes on average 24 hours to complete, the only thing Telecom can do when you're having line faults is to send a Chorus tech around like any other ISP in NZ and booking this takes time when each and every customer on every ISP in NZ expects the ISP to get them online "right now"

Glad you've finally found somebody that can help you, but please sort out your attitude, it's a blanket rule with dealing with any company, no need to pass the blame, just understand it takes time to process things, mistakes can be made as we're human and just be more forgiving if this happens and the company in question will make sure they do their best to get things sorted.

I do apologise if I came across as arrogant in this topic, I, just like other people just don't tolerate it from others.




222 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 45

Trusted

  Reply # 894716 12-Sep-2013 12:47
Send private message

Stryfe: In all honesty, yes there was an internal breakdown with communications at HD. We did not get a chance to object to the ABANDONMENT lodged against the SAM ID as we did not see it. This is on HD, we accept that.

We also accept that there is no blame to be put on Chorus, as they were functioning within the scope of their operation.

What HD does object to is the fact that an ABANDONMENT was lodged in the first place. This is outside the parameters of BAU at TCNZ Retail. The process for the lodgement of an ABANDONMENT is reasonably strict (I did lodge a few in my 5 years at TCNZ).

What has happened in this instance is that someone has followed a deprecated process, which happens (albeit rarely), at the end of the day, human error is human error.

The focus here is not who to blame for what has happened, but the best way to resolve what has happened and restore service to our customer.  To this end we have done what we can to expedite the process (which is unfortunately not a lot).

JamieB's service will be operational again this afternoon.

Regards,

Pierre (not Ben before you pipe up again Mike and John)
HD Net Ltd


As I've stated this is not outside of the business rules of us lodging an abandonment. You're talking about not blaming people and then pushing blame around. A series of unfortunate of events happened there is nothing more to this and Telecom operated within our business rules on abandonment.



16 posts

Geek
+1 received by user: 5


  Reply # 894721 12-Sep-2013 12:55
One person supports this post
Send private message

Yyrael:
Stryfe: In all honesty, yes there was an internal breakdown with communications at HD. We did not get a chance to object to the ABANDONMENT lodged against the SAM ID as we did not see it. This is on HD, we accept that.

We also accept that there is no blame to be put on Chorus, as they were functioning within the scope of their operation.

What HD does object to is the fact that an ABANDONMENT was lodged in the first place. This is outside the parameters of BAU at TCNZ Retail. The process for the lodgement of an ABANDONMENT is reasonably strict (I did lodge a few in my 5 years at TCNZ).

What has happened in this instance is that someone has followed a deprecated process, which happens (albeit rarely), at the end of the day, human error is human error.

The focus here is not who to blame for what has happened, but the best way to resolve what has happened and restore service to our customer.  To this end we have done what we can to expedite the process (which is unfortunately not a lot).

JamieB's service will be operational again this afternoon.

Regards,

Pierre (not Ben before you pipe up again Mike and John)
HD Net Ltd


As I've stated this is not outside of the business rules of us lodging an abandonment. You're talking about not blaming people and then pushing blame around. A series of unfortunate of events happened there is nothing more to this and Telecom operated within our business rules on abandonment.


Well I will see what the TCF think about that, because I disagree.
But I would need all TCNZ and HD documentation on the matter.

HD plus a few telecom guys like yourself have stepped up to help explore this issue.
Route cause needs to be found.

You have been very helpful, but it would make sense for Telecom to rethink about this process as it has caused a problem and hence something in the process needs to be fixed.
Chorus told me today that they "have seen anything like this before", maybe this kind of thing used to happen but it should no longer.

Chorus guys have been awesome.

If anything comes out of this I hope someone at Telecom can review this process and make a tweak. And I am sure that is all it is.


BDFL - Memuneh
61762 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12424

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 894723 12-Sep-2013 12:58
2 people support this post
Send private message

DrFixIt:
NonprayingMantis:
DrFixIt: 

Hi All,

Full disclosure, I work for HD and have dealt with Jamie on several occasions.

.


Just curious,  how come you are tagged as Orcon employee if you work for HD?


Used to work for Orcon before I moved to HD.
Multiple emails have been sent about my Orcon tag.
I imagine it'll be fixed shortly. .. Hence why I made sure to mention that first in my post :)


I am the only one to assign Industry Tags and NEVER received any requests.





56 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 1


  Reply # 894738 12-Sep-2013 13:13
Send private message


As I've stated this is not outside of the business rules of us lodging an abandonment. You're talking about not blaming people and then pushing blame around. A series of unfortunate of events happened there is nothing more to this and Telecom operated within our business rules on abandonment.


As I stated a deprecated process was followed. I didn't mention anything about ABANDONMENT being issued maliciously, in what context was it legitimate to issue an ABANDONMENT in this particular case? I fail to see your logic...

Was the abandonment lodged through Wireline or ICMS? Please do tell...

BDFL - Memuneh
61762 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12424

Administrator
Trusted
Geekzone
Lifetime subscriber

  Reply # 894742 12-Sep-2013 13:25
4 people support this post
Send private message

If the issue at hand is solved any process discussion should really be in private between providers.

It doesn't look good for two providers to be bantering in plain view, folks.




222 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 45

Trusted

  Reply # 894743 12-Sep-2013 13:27
One person supports this post
Send private message

Stryfe:

As I've stated this is not outside of the business rules of us lodging an abandonment. You're talking about not blaming people and then pushing blame around. A series of unfortunate of events happened there is nothing more to this and Telecom operated within our business rules on abandonment.


As I stated a deprecated process was followed. I didn't mention anything about ABANDONMENT being issued maliciously, in what context was it legitimate to issue an ABANDONMENT in this particular case? I fail to see your logic...

Was the abandonment lodged through Wireline or ICMS? Please do tell...


As per Freitasms post the information has been laid out in this thread stating everything that's happened. I consider this issue closed.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic



Twitter »

Follow us to receive Twitter updates when new discussions are posted in our forums:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when news items and blogs are posted in our frontpage:



Follow us to receive Twitter updates when tech item prices are listed in our price comparison site:



Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

Alternatively, you can receive a daily email with Geekzone updates.